84327 v2
The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this report do not
necessarily reflect the views and position of the Executive Directors of the
World Bank, the European Union, or the Government of Romania.
TABLE OF CONTENTs Table of Contents
List of Abbreviations ........................................................................................ 7
Romania’s growth poles policy has shaped an important part of the
country’s development in recent years ......................................................... 9
The current growth poles policy includes several positive features ....... 11
3 Policies adapted to the expected evolution of growth poles ................. 25
On the other hand, the current growth poles policy has a few
shortcomings .................................................................................................... 13
4 Planning for growth poles beyond defined metropolitan boundaries
based on each area’s economic growth potential .................................. 27
A new urban systems approach in Romania is currently prepared
by DG Regional Development within the Ministry of Regional
5 Truly integrated programs ........................................................................ 27
Development and Public Administration (MRDPA) ...................................... 15
There are several recommendations worth considering for the future
6K eep the same number of growth poles (if regions stay the same), but
consider having a different number of urban development poles .......... 29
growth poles policy (2014-2020) .................................................................... 17
Equally important, rather than targeting public investments and
7 Consider the polarizing effect of București within the South Region ..... 29
programs at cities, the ROP should place at its core the people living in
those areas ........................................................................................................ 19
8 Design proper monitoring and evaluation mechanisms ......................... 31
In practice, the implications of this new paradigm for the future growth
poles policy include the following recommendations: 21
9 Designing robust governance structures for growth poles ..................... 33
1 Better definitions of intervention areas around growth poles based on
functional criteria ...................................................................................... 21
10 Consider alternative governance structures to IDAs .............................. 35
2M ore targeted interventions based on specific contextual factors for
each growth pole ...................................................................................... 23
11 Ensure better policy correlations ............................................................. 37
List of Abbreviations List of Abbreviations
EC European Commission
ERDF European Regional Development Fund
EU European Union
ICT Information and Communication Technology
IDA International Development Association
IDP Integrated Development Plan
IEC Increasing Economic Competitiveness
MA Managing Authority
RDA Regional Development Agency
ROP Regional Operational Program
SOP Sectoral Operational Program
3
7
Growth Poles and Urban Development Poles
Urban Development Poles
Growth Poles
Satu-Mare Suceava
Romania’s growth poles policy has shaped an
Iaşi
Oradea
Cluj-Napoca
Bacău
important part of the country’s development in
Arad recent years.
Deva Braşov
Sibiu
Timişoara Galaţi
Brăila
Ploieşti
Râmnicu Vâlcea
Piteşti
Prepared in March 2008, it defined several categories of urban centers: 7
growth poles, one for each development region beyond București and 13
Constanţa
urban development centers of regional importance.
Craiova
The 2007-2013 Regional Operational Programme
allocated dedicated funding for these various
tiers of urban agglomerations with the specified
Performance of the growth poles under the ROP 2007-2013 (by July 2013)
purpose of “increasing the quality of life and to
create jobs in cities by rehabilitating the urban infrastructure, improving
Allocated Funds Share of Share of
(ERDF and State allocated allocated
Projects submitted Contracted projects
Growth Budget) funds funds
Pole
Value Value services, including social services, as well as by developing business support
Mil. EURO Nr. (Mil. EURO) % Nr. (Mil. EURO) %
structures and entrepreneurship.”
Iaşi 111.25 16 171.98 154.59 10 108.68 97.69
Constanţa 90.32 36 92.64 102.57 27 58.04 64.26
Ploieşti 97.00 16 121.58 125.34 14 93.19 96.07
Craiova 95.5 17 122.75 128.54 15 94.9 99.37
Timişoara 70.49 28 92.14 130.73 23 76.94 109.15
Cluj-Napoca 82.41 23 97.51 118.32 17 86.88 105.42
Braşov 74.3 26 95.44 128.45 23 76.16 102.50
TOTAL 621.27 162 794.04 127.81 129 594.79 95.74
Source: The Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration
9
In most countries economic growth is driven by a small number of large cities
Share of growth in total GDP (%), 2000-2007
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Unitary South & West 37.9% 25.6% 9.7% 26.8%
Cyprus 100.0%
Luxembourg 100.0%
Malta 94.5% 5.5%
Greece 64.9% 7.3% 27.8%
Ireland 51.1% 21.3% 27.6%
UK 38.7% 24.0% 15.2% 22.1%
Portugal 33.5% 2.2% 64.3%
France 27.2% 34.4% 5.3% 33.0%
Netherlands 26.6% 31.1% 14.8% 27.4%
Unitary Former Socialist 36.6% 25.2% 4.5% 33.8%
Latvia 68.1% 8.7% 23.2%
Bulgaria 64.7% 14.8% 20.5%
Estonia 63.9% 17.8% 18.3%
Hungary 62.8% 14.5% 22.7%
Lithuania 47.6% 29.7% 22.7%
Czech Republic 42.7% 32.7% 24.7%
Croatia 42.0% 11.3% 46.7%
Slovenia 41.6% 13.7% 44.6%
Romania 24.9% 20.2% 4.4% 50.5%
Poland 21.9% 35.9% 11.2% 31.1%
Unitary Northern 30.6% 26.0% 43.4%
Finland 39.5% 20.3% 40.2%
Denmark 38.5% 34.2% 27.3%
Sweden 28.1% 29.7% 42.2%
Norway 21.5% 20.5% 58.0%
Unitary Regionalised 15.9% 31.8% 20.7% 31.6%
Spain 22.9%
Italy 12.1% 26.3% 15.1% 46.5%
FEDERAL 11.5% 40.1% 13.5% 34.9%
Belgium 43.3% 23.3% 33.5%
Austria 30.2% 23.3% 46.5%
Germany 2.2% 46.2% 18.4% 33.2%
ALL COUNTRIES 28.7% 29.1% 10.8% 31.4%
Capitals Second Tier Other Metro-regions Rest of country
Sources: ESPON and Eurostat
the
fundamental
First, it is based on a
several positive features.
for a country’s economic growth.
from center cities to surrounding areas.
and preparing integrated development plans – both measures are
The current growth poles policy includes
diverse firms, etc.) and integrated development projects for enhanced impact.
for encouraging the formation of urban areas
benefits of agglomeration and spillover effects
balanced long-term development, in line with economic principles regarding
centers within each respective region beyond București. It is also based on the
critical
Second, policymakers selected one growth pole for each region to encourage
clear and simple identification
recognition that cities are critical engines
of seven growth poles as the largest economic and population
with larger mass (bigger labor force; better supply chains; more
Third, ROP funding has been contingent on cities forming metropolitan areas
11
How to define a city (Graz) and a commuting zone (Genova)
On the other hand, the current growth poles
High density cell (>1500 inh. per sq.km.) Urban Centre (Cluster of HD cells with Commune > 50% of its population in an Urban Audit City
policy has a few shortcomings.
Municipalities population > 50.000) urban centre
City Commuting area Commuting area after including For example, it lacks a clear, in-depth understanding of how the designated
enclaves and dropping exclaves
growth poles can contribute to the general development of Romania and it
is inherently based on regional boundaries, even though
some urban centers entail cross-regional synergies. Additionally, the area of
analysis and intervention is usually limited to a 30-kilometer buffer
around growth pole centers, missing the fact that functional
economic areas are usually larger and rely on the fact that people are generally
willing to commute for up to about one-hour each way on a daily basis. Larger
metropolitan areas basically allow for stronger economies, larger labor pools,
and better incentives for investments. Last and not least, the formation of
City Commune with > 15% of its employed
population commuting to the city
Larger Urban Zone
metropolitan areas is based entirely on voluntary agreement among localities.
associations that fail
Commune Added enclave
Removed exclave
In practice, this has led to the formation of
to formally include all localities that fall within
corresponding functional areas.
13
Romania and EU targets towards the Europe 2020 Strategy
Employment R&D CO2 Renewable Energy Early school Tertiary Reduction of
rate (in %) in % of emission energy efficiency leaving in % education population
GDP reduction – reduction in % at risk of
targets of energy poverty
(compared consumption or social
exclusion in
A new urban systems approach in Romania
to 1990 in Mtoe
levels) number of
persons
is currently prepared by DG Regional
Targets 70% 2% 19% 24% 10 Mtoe 11.3% 26.7% 580,000
- RO
Current 63.8% 0.48% 51.84% 20.79 16.6 Mtoe 17.4 21.8 240,000
Development within the Ministry of Regional
situation (2012) (2011) (2011 (2012) (2012) (2012) (2012) (2011
- RO compared compared to
to 1990 2008 levels)
Development and Public Administration
levels)
Targets 75% 3% -20% 20% 368 Mtoe 10% 40% 20,000,000
(MRDPA).
- EU
Source: Romania – EU Partnership Agreement (2014-2020)
Urban mass, Iași Growth Pole (left) and Timișoara Growth Pole (right) thinking on
The pending proposal is more in line with EU-level
territorial development, includes more clear
criteria for classifying different cities, and also
establishes a tentative economic profile for these
urban centers, prioritizing investments tailored
to the specific profile of each growth pole, in line
with preferences expressed in existing integrated
development plans. While further consultations are needed, this
can be considered a strong start by any measure. Future refinements can also
further consider the EC’s broader perspective on urban growth poles. While
relatively diverse, including a high degree of flexibility in recognition of Member
States’ specific development models and needs, the EC’s framework has
evolved continuously, focusing increasingly on the three essential dimensions
of development (also captured in the World Bank’s 2009 World Development
Report): distance, density, and division.
15
Evolution of firm revenues in growth pole areas
9,000,000,000 €
8,000,000,000 €
Constanţa
7,000,000,000 €
Cluj-Napoca
Revenues (Euro)
6,000,000,000 € Timişoara
There are several recommendations worth
Ploieşti
5,000,000,000 €
Braşov
4,000,000,000 € Iaşi
considering for the future growth poles policy
(2014-2020).
Craiova
3,000,000,000 €
2,000,000,000 €
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Data source: ListăFirme
development
For one, economic principles and practice teach that
is inherently uneven: for a country’s economy
to grow, some regions have to grow faster than
others.
Firm revenue growth in growth poles
Growth Pole (%) 2011/2008 Rank (%) 2011/2006 Rank continue encouraging ongoing
As such, the ROP should
Braşov 1% #6 19% #4
external regional convergence and not resist the
Cluj-Napoca
Constanţa
12%
9%
#2 31%
31%
#2
growing internal regional divergence, which in the long
#3 #2
term will generate faster growth, optimal outcomes, and eventually ensure
Craiova 7% #5 15% #6 similar living standards across the country. In other words, higher growth in
Iaşi 8% #4 17% #5 some cities means that more endogenous sources will be generated and could
Ploieşti 12% #2 23% #3
be redistributed to help with key public investment projects in slower-growth
areas.
Timişoara 24% #1 38% #1
România 8% 28%
All 7 Growth Poles 11% 27%
Data source: ListăFirme
17
Equally important, rather than targeting
public investments and programs at cities,
the ROP should place at its core the people
living in those areas.
Better productivity and sustainable economic growth ultimately hinges on the
realization that an economy is the sum of its people. The implication is that
decision-makers should enable people’s access
to opportunities, rather than create opportunities
from scratch in areas where the market does not lead to such outcomes
in the absence of the government’s intervention. Moreover, given current
demographic and migration trends, the new growth poles policy should remain
realistic about what is feasible: in short, if success means that all growth poles
are performing equally well (e.g., having a growing population and a more
powerful local economy), it may be doomed to fail from the start; if, however,
it will focus on the productivity of the people living in the growth poles, it may
very well have a meaningful impact.
19
In practice, the implications of this new
paradigm for the future growth poles policy
include the following recommendations:
1 Better definitions of intervention
areas around growth poles based
on functional criteria:
The current legal framework does not specify why the 30
kilometer buffer was preferred and risks missing out on
integration benefits beyond this limited buffer. Functional
synergies, such as those deduced from commuter data,
would likely lead to more optimal metropolitan areas.
the status quo system also
Moreover,
fails to address situations where
localities refuse to join metropolitan
associations, which limits the potential to develop
truly integrated projects and take full advantage of an area’s
economic mass.
21
2 More targeted interventions based
Potential functional areas are larger than the currently defined
metropolitan areas
Driving Buffers
on specific contextual factors for
around major cities
20 min.
each growth pole:
40 min.
60 min. Data for the 20, 40, 60-minute driving buffers from city centers,
60 min. from
city border
and for 60-minute buffers from city outskirts, show that
different growth poles have different
Iaşi
Cluj-Napoca
Timişoara
strengths at different sizes. For example,
considering a 20 -minute driving buffer, Cluj-Napoca has both
Braşov the largest population and the highest share of firm revenues
of the seven growth poles. Within a 40-minute driving buffer,
Ploieşti Constanța dominates. At the 60-minute limit (both from the
Constanţa
Craiova center city and from the city border), Timișoara ranks first
in economic terms (with the largest share of firm revenues),
Bucureşti
while Craiova prevails in demographic terms (with the largest
population in the area).
1. Downtown Cluj-Napoca; 2. The Port of Agigea, South of Constanţa;
Key indicators for different-sized growth pole functional areas (2011) 3. Timişoara, Industrial Area, detail; 4. Işalniţa, an example of a densely
populated village near Craiova.
Driving time buffer from city center
60 min.
20 min. 40 min. 60 min. from city border
Population 350,000 452,000 757,000 945,000
Timişoara % of National Firm Revenues 6.00%
3.16% 3.41% 5.43%
Population 360,000 482,000 620,000 905,000
Cluj-Napoca % of National Firm Revenues 3.29% 3.48% 3.71% 4.47%
Population 328,000 423,000 582,000 943,000
Iaşi % of National Firm Revenues 1.47% 1.52% 1.60% 2.20%
Craiova
Population
% of National Firm Revenues
302,000 470,000 787,000 1,080,000
2.94%
1 2
1.43% 1.60% 2.70%
Population 312,000 492,000 620,000 716,000
Constanţa
% of National Firm Revenues 2.51% 4.12% 4.54% 4.67%
Population 328,000 485,000 615,000 868,000
Braşov
% of National Firm Revenues 2.65% 2.83% 2.98% 3.54%
Population 305,000 556,000 2,724,000* 3,554,000*
Ploieşti
% of National Firm Revenues 2.89% 3.44% 43.17%* 47.24%*
Population 1,842,000 2,150,000 2,525,000 4,020,000
Bucureşti
% of National Firm Revenues 37.82% 41.15% 41.61% 50.58%
Data Source: National Institute of Statistics and ListăFirme
*Includes figures for București and its surroundings
4 3
23
Zipf distribution in Romania, for 2012
6.5
3 Policies adapted to the expected
Bucureşti
6
evolution of growth poles:
5.5
In most countries that have developed organically, cities follow
a
a statistical oddity
ara
oc
Log of Population
tan i
Iaş
va
Cr ţ a
ap
a uniform distribution pattern,
işo
aio
j-N
known as the Zipf Rule or the Rank-Size Rule.
Tim
ns
Clu
5
Co
The latest census data (2012) show that cities in Romania
are realigning themselves around a city distribution that one
4.5
would expect to see in a market economy, with the largest
city followed by 1-2 cities of about half the population, then
4
by 2-3 rank 3 cities of about a third the population, and so
Cluj-Napoca and Timișoara
on. In particular,
3.5
are emerging as Rank 2 cities behind
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 București.
Log of Rank
Demographic shifts in the largest Romanian cities New construction in Cluj-Napoca (left) and Timișoara (right)
Census Population
2002 Rank 2012 Rank % Change
Bucureşti 1,934,449 #1 1,883,425 #1 -2.64%
Cluj-Napoca 318,027 #3 324,576 #2 2.06%
Timişoara 317,651 #4 319,279 #3 0.51%
Iaşi 321,580 #2 290,422 #4 -9.69%
Constanţa 310,526 #5 283,872 #5 -8.58%
Craiova 302,622 #6 269,506 #6 -10.94%
Braşov 298,584 #7 253,200 #7 -15.20%
Galaţi 283,901 #8 249,432 #8 -12.14%
Ploieşti 232,452 #9 209,945 #9 -9.68%
Oradea 206,527 #10 196,367 #10 -4.92%
Source: National Institute of Statistics, Census data
25
Population (left) and economic (right) gravitational models
4 Planning for growth poles beyond
defined metropolitan boundaries
based on each area’s economic
growth potential:
Gravitational models show several
potential con-urbations and growth
corridors that could benefit from integrated planning
Note: The population gravitational model used Census 2012 population numbers, while the and investments: București-Ploiești-Brașov; București-
economic gravitational model used firm revenues data for 2011. Data was obtained from the Pitești; the area framed by Iași, Botoșani, Suceava, Piatra
National Institute of Statistics and ListăFirme.
Neamț, and Bacău; the area framed by Cluj-Napoca, Târgu-
Mureș, Sibiu, and Alba-Iulia; and the Timișoara-Arad growth
corridor.
The Sustainable Development Strategy for Brașov Metropolitan Area 2012-
2020 (left), The Development Strategy for the Alba Iulia Municipality (right)
5 Truly integrated programs:
Ideally, integrated development plans (IDPs) would include
a comprehensive action plan, with a list of projects to be
financed from the ROP, from other EU sources, as well as
from the local and national budget. These programs should
also explore ways to benefit larger metropolitan areas and
multiple sectorsto enable optimal synergies.
In this sense, new instruments planned under the next
EU programing exercise, such as Integrated Territorial
Investments, should be utilized to ensure proper funding and
implementation mechanisms for integrated programs.
27
(clockwise from top-left) Piatra Neamţ, Oradea, Alba-Iulia and Râmnicu Vâlcea
6 Keep the same number of growth
poles (if regions stay the same),
but consider having a different
number of urban development poles:
A look at firm revenue data indicates that the current
growth poles are indeed the main economic engines within
their respective regions – each generating at least 20% of
there is a larger
regional firm revenues. However,
number of cities than the current 13
urban development poles, which help
regional growth. Thus, it may pay to consider
designating all county capitals, outside the growth poles
themselves, as urban development poles.
7 Consider the polarizing effect of
Demographic (left) and economic (right) gravitational model for the
South Region
București within the South Region:
Targovişte Targovişte
All the data indicates that București has the strongest
Ploieşti Ploieşti polarization effect within the South Region, and development
Piteşti Piteşti
Slobozia Slobozia
planning for the South Region cannot be done with București
outside the picture. An option would also be to absorb
Călăraşi Călăraşi
the București-Ilfov Region within the South Region, and
have București-Ploiești as the main
Alexandria Alexandria
Giurgiu Giurgiu
regional growth corridor.
29
8
The LHDI for 2002 (top) and 2011 (bottom)
Regions
Design proper monitoring and
LHDI Index by Locality
in 2002 evaluation mechanisms:
Very poor
Poor
Lower-middle developed Finding the right indicators is critical both for the proper design
Middle developed
of a growth poles policy and for monitoring the performance
Upper-middle developed
Developed of such a policy. Ideally, these indicators would be easy
Upper developed to collect and easy to interpret. Two basic performance
indicators that are collected annually are population
and firm revenues, and they give a good base-
line indication of an area’s performance. A longer term
performance review could make use of more complex and
comprehensive composite indicators, such as the Local
Human Development Index developed by
Dumitru Sandu.
Regions
Firm Revenues by District in Romania, in 2011
LHDI Index by Locality
in 2011 Cities w/ Pop. >50,000 and <100,000
Satu-Mare Cities w/ Pop. >100,000
Very poor Botoşani
Suceava Firm Revenues (in Euro)
Poor
Baia Mare in 2011
Lower-middle developed 0 - 22,293,030
Middle developed Zalău Iaşi 22,293,031 - 72,920,503
Oradea Bistriţa
72,920,504 - 151,848,207
Upper-middle developed Piatra-Neamţ
Cluj-Napoca 151,848,208 - 295,925,442
Developed Roman
Vaslui 295,925,443 - 552,642,494
Upper developed Turda Târgu Mureş Bacău 552,642,495 - 1,069,128,770
1,069,128,771 - 1,877,949,680
Oneşti Bârlad 1,877,949,681 - 3,008,362,992
Arad Alba Iulia Mediaş
3,008,362,993 - 6,472,648,951
Timişoara Deva Sfântu Gheorghe 6,472,648,952 - 77,161,704,756
Hunedoara Sibiu
Braşov Focşani
Galaţi
Petroşani
Brăila Tulcea
Reşiţa Râmnicu Vâlcea Buzău
Târgu Jiu
Târgovişte Ploieşti
Drobeta-Turnu Severin Piteşti
Slobozia
Slatina Bucureşti
Craiova
Călăraşi Constanţa
Alexandria
Giurgiu
Data source: Dumitru Sandu
Note: The blank spots indicate localities for which no data was available Data Source: National Institute of Statistics
31
Governance structure of growth poles
Ministry of
Economy and
Finance
Ministry of
Regional
Development
9 Designing robust governance
structures for growth poles:
Institutional frameworks governing
growth poles and ensuring implementation
Growth Pole
Regional Leader
Development Agency (assisted by an executive apparatus) and monitoring of IDPs, should include both
representing the structures representing and mobilizing local communities’
Growth Pole Intercommunity Development interest as well as specially designated regional/central
Coordinator Association support. More attention needs to be given to capacity
(assisted by technical (composed of representatives of all building and generation of an enabling legal and regulatory
staff) growth pole area member environment for such institutions.
communities)
Technical assistance projects supporting the activity of growth pole
coordinators offices
No Growth Pole Total budget Total eligible Total solicited and %
requested expenses approved eligible
(in RON) (in RON) expenses (up to
May 2013)
1 Braşov 3.579.459 3.262.309 1.340.961 41,10
2 Cluj-Napoca 2.583.310 2.386.080 696.781 29,20
3 Constanţa 4.044.874 3.629.125 1.536.389 42,33
4 Craiova 2.324.990 2.087.881 813.721 38,97
5 Iaşi 3.462.592 3.109.660 1.354.182 43,55
6 Ploieşti 4.058.816 3.626.877 1.451.426 40,02
7 Timişoara 1.776.405 1.650.491 622.362 37,71
Source: data processed from www.poat.ro, valid by May 2013
Note: in italic - the growth poles that do not correspond with the location of the main
headquarters of RDAs.
33
Performance Indicators of Growth Poles IDAs
No Growth Pole Name of IDA Year of No of Total Total Fixed
10 Consider alternative governance
structures to IDAs:
establish-
ment
employees
(full time
revenues
(RON)
expendi-
ture
assets
(RON)
It is obvious that the current IDA set-up has many
contracts) (RON) shortcomings with respect to effective metropolitan
governance. For one, center cities tend to dominate these
1 Braşov Metropolitan Agency for 2006 25 2.937.098 2.908.505 738.195
Sustainable Development associations. In addition: smaller localities lack the needed
Brașov co-financing for truly metropolitan projects; politics often
gets in the way of project implementation at the metropolitan
level; and IDAs are primarily used as a vehicle for attracting
2 Cluj-Napoca Intercommunity 2008 no balance sheet recorded
Development Association ROP funds and nothing more. As such, national and local
establishment of
Cluj Metropolitan Area
authorities may consider the
3 Craiova Intercommunity 2009 3 62 67.679 -
metropolitan development agencies,
Development Association which could draw on a very rich international experience,
Craiova Metropolitan Area
and on the good performance of the regional development
agencies.
4 Constanţa Intercommunity 2007 14 2.170.595 1.912.124 40.942
Development Association
Constanța Metropolitan
Area London Metropolitan Area (London Commuter Belt)
5 Iaşi Iași Metropolitan Area 2004 7 697.468 733.072 4.828
Association
6 Ploieşti Intercommunity 2009 8 733.606 568.477 34.154
Development Association
“Ploiești-Prahova Growth
Pole”
7 Timişoara Intercommunity 2009 - 7.071 15.472 7.770
Development Association
“Timişoara Growth Pole”
Source of data: MFinante.ro, as per the last reporting documents recorded (2011)
Source: Office for National Statistics, United Kingdom
35
11
List of poles of competitiveness submitted for funding
Ensure better policy correlations:
No Growth Pole Economic profiles, Name of pole of competitiveness Economic profile of pole
as set by IDP initiated (application submitted to of competitiveness
MA SOP IEC)
As growth poles are designed, essentially, as economic
1 Braşov technologies for no project submitted n/a engines of the regions where they are located, growth poles
sustainable development,
policy should seek to correlate and build on economic
tourism
development policies. Recent initiatives of the Ministry
2 Cluj-Napoca energy industry, ITC, TREC - Transnational Renewable Renewable energies of Economy have illustrated interest in aterritorial
perspective over industrial policy and
business support services, Energies Cluster*
specialized medical Transylvanian Furniture Cluster Furniture
private sector support via clusters and
services, biotechnologies
POLARIS ICT
EXCELSIOR – EXCELency in ICT
poles of competitiveness. Such initiatives may
Information Systems Oriented
Towards Results
3 Craiova IT and high technologies ICT – Regional Competitiveness Pole ICT complement the growth poles policy by providing the
funding mechanisms and catalyzing
Automotive Sud Vest Oltenia Pole Automotive industry
INOVTRANS Rolling stock manufacturing
TurOlt InTT – Innovation and
traditions in Oltenia
Tourism
the business environments in each growth
pole.
4 Constanţa maritime industry, tourism, no project submitted n/a
energy industry, agro-food
Palace of the Parliament, București.
5 Iaşi ITC, new/creative no project submitted n/a
industries
6 Timişoara automotive industry and AUTOMOTIVEST Association Automotive industry
ICT ICT Regional Cluster ICT
Romanian Sustainable Energy Green energy
Cluster* (manufacturing of equipment)
El Camino Constructions
7 Ploieşti oil industry, energy CREVIS ICT
industry Aircraft production
Pole of competitiveness in the field
of automatic systems and robotics
Source: data processed from MA SOP IEC and IDPs of each growth pole
Note: TREC (Cluj Napoca) and ROSENC (Timișoara) have joined MedGreen to submit a common
application for MA SOP IEC. For this reason, they do not show up as standalone applicants on
the MA SOP IEC list.
Source: Shutterstock
37